Hon’ble Yashwant Varma, J.—This petition (one of the many which come before this Court and crowd its otherwise overburdened roster) lays challenge to an order dated 2.12.2014 in terms of which the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Chunar, District Mirzapur has finalized the electoral college of 15 members to be utilized for holding the elections of the Committee of Management of the Society in question.

2. From the facts brought on record and in respect of which there is no dispute it is apparent that the last elections of the Society are said to have been held in the year 1986. Three rival claims were set up in the course of the elections and ultimately, the dispute itself was decided on 17.10.1988. This fact has been duly noticed by the Court while deciding Writ Petition No. 10747 of 2012 by its judgement and order dated 26.3.2012. This Court noticed that after 1980, no elections whatsoever had been held and accordingly proceeded to direct the Sub Divisional Magistrate of the area to take further steps in accordance with the provisions of Section 25 (2) of the Societies Registration Act 1860. This judgement required the Sub Divisional Magistrate to determine the electoral college after inviting objections and upon such determination to hold elections within two months thereafter. It is pursuant to the above directions of this Court that the impugned order has been made by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Chunar, District Mirzapur.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has sought to assail this order on various grounds. It has been submitted that the inclusion of the name of Badri Prasad Chaudhry on the basis of documents executed in 1962 was illegal. It was further contended that the co-option of two members was only for three years and therefore came to an end in 1989 itself. Learned Counsel further submits that the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 are family members and could not become the office bearers. He further refers to the pleadings taken in paras 52, 53 and 54 of the writ petition to contend that various members have been enrolled in 1983 and thereafter under the forged signatures of one Lallan Ram Singh.

4. Sri Ashish Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing for the contesting private respondents, has pointed out that this Court in its judgement dated 26.3.2012 had clearly noted the agreement between the parties that the last election of the Society had been held in the year 1986. He submits that at the relevant time there were 31 members forming the General Body of the Society out of which 16 have died and accordingly the electoral college of 15 has rightly been settled by the Sub Divisional Magistrate.

5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the records, this Court finds that the finalization of the electoral college has been made pursuant to the directions issued by this Court on 26.3.2012. The directions themselves came to be issued, upon this Court finding that no elections had been held in respect of the Society after 1986. The judgement dated 26.3.2012 further required the Assistant Registrar to hold the elections within two months from the date of finalization of the electoral college. Since the above process has already been set in motion in light of the directions issued by this Court, this Court is of the firm opinion that no circumstances warrant interference in these sort of matters under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and any interference at this stage would clearly derail the election process which has been set in motion and as has been noticed hereinabove in the facts of this case after more than decades.

6. The second ground on which this Court finds itself unable to entertain the writ petition is that the various contentions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner would clearly entail an enquiry into disputed questions of fact. This Court has time and again noted that such disputed questions of facts arising out of and in course of election proceedings for